HK Mark 23 VS. M1911 - Page 3

Adamantium · May 10, 2012, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Bottom line. The 1911 is made by almost EVERY major manufacturer because they are popular pistols. Bottom line. Most 1911's (that are worth mention) are around $1k and u. Bottom line. Most 1k 1911's do not have the same reliability that $1k HK's do. Bottom line. The MK23 is a very expensive pistol which is why it's not as popular. Do you see more Taurus 1911's or Wilson Combat 1911's? Bottom line. HK's market is NOT targeted for the civilian market. This has been known for a long time. They focus on military and LE contracts. If they made crap guns then they would've never gotten their contracts and would've never stayed in business... If you don't like their marketing stance don't buy one. Isn't it funny how that most of the US special task teams such as Delta and SEALs use HK?

What happened 40 years ago is irrelevant. Are you going to tell me that the first 1911's were 100% perfect. The 1911 has such a following because its 101 years old. 1911's are great guns that have stood the test of time but the design is again over 100 years old.

The fact that you find this thread hilarious is hilarious to me because you laugh at other peoples opinions... Our responses are to the OP and you're responding to us. I'm glad we amuse you

I think one thing is certain, the Mk 23 is by far the best gun in the world to have for screaming out "You can't handle the truth!" while sitting behind your keyboard. A post like this all but proves it. On another note it is also very good at crazy "what if?" situations like SHTF and Hollywood action scenes. Perhaps not the best, but still up there.

The OP wanted to know which gun "performed" better in accuracy and reliability. Ironically H&K's are rarely seen in the world of competition shooting where both those things are very important. Even more ironically the 1911 basically got a second life due to competition shooting.

Ultimately though it's the OP's money so if he wants an $1800 H&K over a whatever brand 1911 it's his money to spend. Post like that are funny, that was my main point.

Pilot · May 11, 2012, 05:39 AM

The 1911 has been around 100 years because it works, and almost every gun manufacture making semi-auto pistols INCLUDING HK uses the same operating system, the Browning short recoil, locked breech.

Cycrops · May 12, 2012, 09:24 AM

I was at the LGS yesterday and they had a MK 23 in stock. I didn't handle it, but that thing is seriously massive. I'd love to shoot one someday.

HKFan9 · May 12, 2012, 09:35 PM

I love and carry a 1911.... but having sold guns for a long time and fired the MK23 it is a viable option depending on what your needs are.

You can sit here and bicker like immature children all day, no one benefits including yourselves.

The MK23 was not designed with civilians in mind at all. HK was given a list of demands in which they designed the firearm around.

The 1911 has also been approved upon over the 100 years its been around from when it was born to be a loose fitted, crappy sighted, trench gun.

I know people like collecting old things, but seriously some of the older "made in the hay day" 1911's I've shot and handled were just a disgrace compared to some of todays.

I love the 1911... and I am also an H&K fanboy for the P7. The 1911 and the MK23 only share a common caliber... they are much different firearms.

I would take a guess that 95% of people bashing the MK23 have never handled one, let alone fired one.

MLeake · May 13, 2012, 10:51 AM

I hadn't noticed any bashing. Saying the Mk23 is huge is not bashing - it is a large pistol, with a large grip. It is also somewhat expensive. That doesn't make it bad, it just limits its suitability to fewer pursuits, and to a smaller portion of the shooting populace.

CDR_Glock · September 23, 2012, 07:03 AM

I have the following 45 ACPS:

Glock 30/36
Sig P220
Mars armament T.H.U.G. Colt 1911
Ed Brown Special Forces
Wilson CQB
Hk Mark 23
Hk USP
Detonics Combat Master V

Side by side, I shoot my Mark 23 better. For me it handles better for controlled pairs. It is heavier, and it has a nearly 6" barrel. The trigger is wider and more comfortable. For 7, 15 and 25 yards, I shoot the Mark 23 more accurately.

Side by side with my T.H.U.G. 1911, the Mark 23 still outdoes it at 7, 15, 25 yards for me. The sights have a lot to do with it more than the "platforms".

The Mark 23 Compared to a CQB or Special Forces, they're a tie. However, I can hit plates at 50, 75 yards better with a CQB or Ed Brown. It's easier to handle a lighter pistol for longer distances, with respect to freehand shooting with open sights. then again, I've been shooting a 1911 longer and more than I have owned a Mark 23. I'm accustomed to the specific sights and the trigger weight of these specific 1911s.

The Mark 23 is a heavy beast. Carrying it would be a chore. The trigger may not suit everyone, and neither would the massive size of the grip. If you have medium or small sized hands, forget it. They also had a specific purpose for Spec War. The 1911 is a general use defensive firearm. Backup to a rifle on the battlefield.

If you have the dough, have long fingers or large hands, and are willing to work with the pistol, then it's likely going to be a tie with a 1911. The 1911 has a single action trigger that is much easier to fire quickly at any distance. It fits more people's hands. For the 1911s in the same price range, the quality is on par for accuracy and reliability. One is more resistant to sea water but I have lived near the beach and never saw a range on the ocean.

10mm4ever · September 24, 2012, 10:35 AM

What a ridiculous comparison! The most proven combat pistol ever vs. an aberration, designed as an "offensive handgun". That is without question, an oxy-moron. In a nutshell, the spec-ops teams it was designed for dont even use them.

May 11, 2012, 05:39 AM	#52
Pilot Senior Member Join Date: December 21, 2000 Posts: 4,193	The 1911 has been around 100 years because it works, and almost every gun manufacture making semi-auto pistols INCLUDING HK uses the same operating system, the Browning short recoil, locked breech. __________________ Pilot

May 12, 2012, 09:24 AM	#53
Cycrops Member Join Date: January 7, 2012 Location: Illinois Posts: 99	I was at the LGS yesterday and they had a MK 23 in stock. I didn't handle it, but that thing is seriously massive. I'd love to shoot one someday.

May 12, 2012, 09:35 PM	#54
HKFan9 Senior Member Join Date: May 3, 2008 Posts: 3,057	I love and carry a 1911.... but having sold guns for a long time and fired the MK23 it is a viable option depending on what your needs are. You can sit here and bicker like immature children all day, no one benefits including yourselves. The MK23 was not designed with civilians in mind at all. HK was given a list of demands in which they designed the firearm around. The 1911 has also been approved upon over the 100 years its been around from when it was born to be a loose fitted, crappy sighted, trench gun. I know people like collecting old things, but seriously some of the older "made in the hay day" 1911's I've shot and handled were just a disgrace compared to some of todays. I love the 1911... and I am also an H&K fanboy for the P7. The 1911 and the MK23 only share a common caliber... they are much different firearms. I would take a guess that 95% of people bashing the MK23 have never handled one, let alone fired one.

May 13, 2012, 10:51 AM	#55
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	I hadn't noticed any bashing. Saying the Mk23 is huge is not bashing - it is a large pistol, with a large grip. It is also somewhat expensive. That doesn't make it bad, it just limits its suitability to fewer pursuits, and to a smaller portion of the shooting populace.

September 23, 2012, 07:03 AM	#56
CDR_Glock Senior Member Join Date: September 30, 2010 Posts: 704	I have the following 45 ACPS: Glock 30/36 Sig P220 Mars armament T.H.U.G. Colt 1911 Ed Brown Special Forces Wilson CQB Hk Mark 23 Hk USP Detonics Combat Master V Side by side, I shoot my Mark 23 better. For me it handles better for controlled pairs. It is heavier, and it has a nearly 6" barrel. The trigger is wider and more comfortable. For 7, 15 and 25 yards, I shoot the Mark 23 more accurately. Side by side with my T.H.U.G. 1911, the Mark 23 still outdoes it at 7, 15, 25 yards for me. The sights have a lot to do with it more than the "platforms". The Mark 23 Compared to a CQB or Special Forces, they're a tie. However, I can hit plates at 50, 75 yards better with a CQB or Ed Brown. It's easier to handle a lighter pistol for longer distances, with respect to freehand shooting with open sights. then again, I've been shooting a 1911 longer and more than I have owned a Mark 23. I'm accustomed to the specific sights and the trigger weight of these specific 1911s. The Mark 23 is a heavy beast. Carrying it would be a chore. The trigger may not suit everyone, and neither would the massive size of the grip. If you have medium or small sized hands, forget it. They also had a specific purpose for Spec War. The 1911 is a general use defensive firearm. Backup to a rifle on the battlefield. If you have the dough, have long fingers or large hands, and are willing to work with the pistol, then it's likely going to be a tie with a 1911. The 1911 has a single action trigger that is much easier to fire quickly at any distance. It fits more people's hands. For the 1911s in the same price range, the quality is on par for accuracy and reliability. One is more resistant to sea water but I have lived near the beach and never saw a range on the ocean.

September 24, 2012, 10:35 AM	#57
10mm4ever Senior Member Join Date: December 11, 2005 Location: SW Ohio Posts: 808	What a ridiculous comparison! The most proven combat pistol ever vs. an aberration, designed as an "offensive handgun". That is without question, an oxy-moron. In a nutshell, the spec-ops teams it was designed for dont even use them.